Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 18, 2:23 pm, lein <jan.leine.we...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 10:44 am, xyzzy <xyzzy.du...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:36 pm, "the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx"
<the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:25 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.du...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:14 pm, "the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx"
<the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:09 pm, xyzzy <xyzzy.du...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 12:31 pm, "the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx"
<the_andrew_sm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 18, 9:57 am, xyzzy <xyzzy.d...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1447447.html
The judge is not against homeschooling per se.
The wife is in a cult that is described as abusive, practices
brainwashing, and is run by fear and manipulation. He came to that
conclusion not by taking the husband's word for it, but by getting
testimony from experts.
The wife is alienating the children not only from their father but
also from their grandparents and other family members as well
including her own parents and her sister, in the name of the cult.
IMO, this just reinforces that the judge ruled correctly and all the
martyrdom ginned up by homeschooling interests is bullshit. Your
normal homeschooler, including your normal evangelical Christian
homeschooler, would not be a target of a ruling like this. Just like
I said from the very beginning, though I did benefit from watching
this case unfold on local news.
I'm not certain we'll ever get the whole story. Especially, if we're
depending on expert (read: paid) testimony.
My only question about the judgment is: If she's such a bad influence,
then why does she have custody?
a. <-obviously blinded by evangelical 'winger illogic
Read the article again -- they have joint custody.
Nothing is more annoying than someone that says "read the article
again" instead of thinking about what I actually said.
Joint custody means she has custody.
You're splitting hairs, the normal use of "she has custody" means
she's has primary custody.
One of us is.
Do you have a house in hippy county, NC?
Joint custody means the kids will solely be under her control at
times.
And under his at others.
Really?
Joint custody means this mom who is apparently ruining her children
will be able to continue to do that.
Not now that the kids will be going to public school.
So, the judgment that she was ruining her kids scholastically was
based on the fact that they are testing grades higher than the public
school to which they are now being sent? Or, is the judgment that she
was just ruining her kids based on the fact that even though they will
be at her home [likely a majority of the time] the public school
system will save them?
The judge found that it was in the children's best interest to be in
public schools considering the fact that she was homeschooling them
based on the curriculum of a cult (the curriculum inferred from the
article, not explicitly stated). Plus she was apparently sequestering
them from all other influences except herself and her cult, including
her own parents and family members. So the judge sent the kids to
public school to make sure they aren't completely sheltered by cult-
mom and only exposed to her perspective, but he didn't feel she was
bad enough to deprive her completely of custody. The fact that the
kids should have time with their mother, and the fact that she
shouldn't completely control their upbringing, are not mutually
exclusive statements. I don't see why this is so hard to follow.
The judgment was not on homeschools per se, it was on the mother's vs.
the father's idea of how the children should be brought up, and
possibly a judgment on the particular homeschooling curriculum she was
using..
So if the father offered to replace the mother and home school the
kids himself, it might be okay for him to do so.
I'm not the judge but I wouldn't rule it out completely. Just like
everything did in this case, it depends. What kind of curriculum,
what kind of exposure will the kids to have to ideas other than Dad's,
etc.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: the_andrew_smith@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- References:
- Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: xyzzy
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: the_andrew_smith@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: xyzzy
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: the_andrew_smith@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: xyzzy
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: the_andrew_smith@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: xyzzy
- Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- From: lein
- Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- Prev by Date: Speaking of bonuses......
- Next by Date: Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- Previous by thread: Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- Next by thread: Re: Update on the homeschool/public school judicial case that you prolly won't see on 'winger blogs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|